The Role of Aesthetics in Engineering Design – Insights Gained from

Cross-cultural Research into Traditional Fishing Vessels in Indonesia

Richard Birmingham
Marine, Offshore and Subsea Technology Group, School of Engineering,
Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
I Putu Arta Wibawa
Politeknik Perkapalan Negeri Surabaya, Jl. Teknik Kimia, Kampus ITS Sukolilo – Surabaya, Indonesia

ABSTRACT: The design of a small fishing vessel for the coastal waters of Indonesia is a straight forward
technical challenge, however some initiatives to introduce newly designed vessels with more advanced tech-
nology have been unsuccessful. The observation that the appearance of rejected craft contrasts markedly with
the traditional vessels operating in the area has led to the consideration of the importance of aesthetics in engi-
neering design that is reported in this paper. Definitions of beauty, their relevance to engineering design, and
alternative approaches to decisions regarding form and style are discussed, with examples taken from the marine
domain. A proposal to make explicit the place of aesthetics in one theoretical model of the design process is
followed by a description of the design of a fishing vessel for eastern Java, this being an example of cross-
cultural design in practice, where aesthetics was given a prominent role.

1 INTRODUCTION

The products of engineering design, due to their size or location, can have a significant impact
on the visual experience of those who are operating them, and on those living or working in
relatively close proximity. Despite this the role of aesthetics in the design process is not always
considered in any detail, and can even be ignored entirely. In the maritime sector a range of
cases can be found, from the design of a luxury yacht at one extreme, where style can be ele-
vated to the most important design driver, to the design of an offshore oil platform at the op-
posite extreme, where appearance might be considered an irrelevance. However even in an
entirely functional artefact, such as a cargo ship, anecdotal evidence suggests that there is value
in a product that is pleasing to the senses, one example (described informally by an ex-mariner,
Dr Kayvan Pazouki, 2016) being the preference of a company’s seagoing personnel to work
aboard the oldest ship in the fleet, despite its poorer reliability, simply because its more tradi-
tional lines and style gave them greater pride in their work. Despite this evident pleasure af-
forded to the operators working aboard a vessel that had acknowledged aesthetic merit, to in-
clude such a subtle and esoteric benefit into calculations, and to establish the added value in
cash terms, would be an almost impossible task.
Fishing vessels would conventionally be put into the same category as cargo ships, in terms
of the unimportance of aesthetics in a design task that is driven by functionality. However in
the course of research (funded by the Indonesian Ministry of Research Technology and Higher
Education in the form of an overseas post graduate studies scholarship) into the design of a
sustainable fishing vessel, it became apparent that the visual characteristic of the design had
greater significance than anticipated. The vessel was to be used for operation in the inshore
fisheries of eastern Java, where the traditional boats are striking in their dramatic shape and
ornamentation (Figure 1). As an exercise in engineering design a low technology fishing boat
of under 15 meters length for operation in the developing world (implying a low labour cost
economy), is a straight forward challenge for a naval architect, and has little technical com-
plexity.
Figure 1. An example a traditional Indonesian fishing vessel of eastern Java.

However despite the apparent simplicity of the task, evidence from earlier initiatives indi-
cated that new vessel designs were not readily accepted by the operators. The research revealed
that although the technical challenge involved in designing a new fishing vessel was straight-
forward, there was a parallel challenge associated with the cross-cultural nature of the task that
could only be resolved by giving prominence to the appearance of the vessel. Exploring the
issues relating to aesthetics for this specific case led to insights into their role in the general
context of engineering design.

2 PRIORITISING AESTHETICS IN ENGINEERING DESIGN

At the outset of a design exercise the list of requirements that could be considered and priori-
tised might start with cost, and then take in such things as safety, weight, size, efficiency, reli-
ability, ease of production, and ease of maintenance. The requirements might also include ele-
ments relating to human factors such as limits on temperature, noise and vibration, or others
relating to habitability and comfort. But for a design exercise that is driven by functionality,
aesthetics need not be mentioned – after all, what unambiguous and verifiable metric can be
used to specify a requirement for beauty?
This neglect of the physical appearance of the designed object is not the case for all engi-
neered products. The field of industrial design is dedicated to the interaction of the product
with people, with both ergonomics and aesthetics being central to the success of the design.
For products that are to be mass produced and sold into a competitive market, an elegant form
can be perceived as an indicator of quality, and the desirability of the product enhanced by the
tactile and visual pleasure experienced by the user. The Apple Corporation, with its range of
products derived from the i-phone, are a remarkable example of the power of aesthetics for a
mass produced product, and in the automotive industry style is a significant driver of a design.
This paper is reporting on research undertaken in the marine context, so the relevant designed
products are ships and boats of all types and sizes. Although the vast volumes associated with
the production of smart phones and cars are not found in this sector, recreational craft can be
produced in the hundreds and so, just as with cars, successful sales may depend on attractive
styling. Even with much larger vessels that are made in small batches of two or three, if they
are being sold into a highly competitive market the advantage of product differentiation derived
from a visual appearance that is associated with a distinct brand can be significant. This can be
seen in recent years with the success of the X bow concept, a patented hull form that has been
adapted for a variety of vessel types (as found on the Innovation pages of the Ulstein Group
website in July 2017), one example of which is shown in Figure 2. Claims are made for the
performance advantages of this bow form, but even disregarding this technical aspect of the
design it is evident that a marketing success has been achieved due to the strikingly different
aesthetics which distinguish these vessels from other functionally similar craft with conven-
tional bow shapes.

Figure 2. An offshore supply vessel with patented X Bow, a style that has created a strong brand identity (De-
signed by Ulstein Group, www.ulstein.com)

The examples given above all have appearance as an important element of the design, but in
every case this is an element of the marketing strategy, and the purpose of enhancing the visual
appeal is to gain a competitive advantage. There are however one-off products where appear-
ance can dominate all other considerations for different reasons, and examples of these can
again be found in the maritime sector. Luxury mega yachts, which are high powered floating
recreational palaces for the extraordinarily rich, are ordered and owned essentially as a demon-
stration of wealth, and so the visual impression and on-board experience drives a designer to
ensure that this statement is made boldly and clearly. As a result appearance becomes more
important than many other considerations. Similarly passengers on cruise liners, even if not at
the extreme end of the wealth scale, are in part looking for confirmation of their success, and
so both the external impression and the visual impact of the internal accommodation and rec-
reational facilities have to be considered in detail. In the case of cruise liners stylists and interior
designers are contracted to work alongside naval architects and marine engineers to ensure that
aesthetic and engineering decisions are linked (Montgomery 2015). With mega yachts the roles
may be even be reversed, so that it is the engineers who are contracted in to provide support to
the project. Design credit is given to those who are primarily responsible for the external and
internal appearance of the vessel (as evidenced in “The Fifty Most Beautiful” [2015]), these
being designers who often do not have a formal education in naval architecture, but who have
a background in industrial design or other creative disciplines, including fine art.
The discussion above demonstrates that examples can be found where the ultimate users of
the product dictate that appearance must take a high priority. But what of the many engineering
products where the design is driven by cost, and this is itself derived from efficiency and ef-
fectiveness? In some cases the client providing the design requirement may not be the operator
directly engaged with the product, but desk based and remote from the built artefact itself, and
so have no personal interest in the issue of appearance. Examples of such cases, again from the
maritime sector, are cargo ships such as bulk carriers or oil tankers, dredgers, offshore supply
vessels, and fishing boats. In such examples of engineering design, the visual impact of the
design is only considered informally while optimising the explicitly stated requirements. In the
formal procedures aesthetics are neglected, as evidenced by the established models of the de-
sign process found in the theoretical texts on engineering design. There is no spoke on the
common presentations of the design spiral, nor a box in the established higher level models of
design philosophy (see summaries in Birmingham et al, 1995), that is labelled ‘aesthetics’.

3 BEAUTY IN ENGINEERING DESIGN

Beauty is a word that can make engineers uncomfortable. It is not just that there is no metric
by which to measure it, after all ‘engineering judgement’ is used to make decisions based on
experience rather than hard data. The difficulty is that most engineers would consider them-
selves untrained and unqualified to make a judgment as to whether the design ‘pleases the
aesthetic senses, especially the sight’ (Oxford Dictionary 2017), or ‘exalts the mind or spirit’
(Merriam-Webster 2017), these both being elements of formal definitions of ‘beauty’. Where
such judgement is an important element of the design process the decisions are contracted out,
as indicated in the examples discussed above where interior designers or stylists collaborate
with the engineers. In other cases the engineer can fall back on the long established principle
that ‘form follows function’. This phrase was first coined by Sullivan (1896) when referring to
the natural world in the context of the architectural form of sky scrapers. The concept permits
the designer to abdicate responsibility for the appearance of the product, the justification being
that if the product is functionally successful then its form is inherently correct too.
The idea that the appearance of an object will be pleasing if its shape (form) is dictated by
what it has to do (function) has been extended into the concept of ‘functional beauty’ (Sheridan
2014). The analysis of functional beauty suggests that it has two parameters which in essence
are the degree of refinement of appearance, and the degree of refinement of function, although
Sheridan uses longer terms, the former parameter being ‘Knowledge of function’, and the latter
being ‘Purity in aim and elegance.’ Any design can be mapped into the design space shown in
Figure 3 (which extends the thinking of Sheridan [2014, 74]) with designs that do have ‘func-
tional beauty’ being both familiar and efficient. Inspection of the diagram shows that designs
could be unsuccessful with respect to functional beauty due to being insufficiently or exces-
sively refined in either of the parameters of function or appearance:
 Insufficiently developed functionality is self-explanatory, but at the extreme the object
just doesn’t work.
 Excessive refinement of function is less intuitive, but it is possible that an object is
extremely effective, but at such cost that it is no longer appropriate. It is not fit for
purpose as it is not optimally efficient. It is interesting that Sheridan terms such a failing
as ‘elegant’, although ‘over engineered’ is more fitting.
 Insufficient attention to appearance could result in a design that is so far from the ex-
pected form that the object is unrecognisable.
  Excessive refinement of appearance can result in the standard form being abstracted (or
‘codified’ in Sheridan’s terms) to such an extent that it is unusable. An amusing exam-
ple of this type of failing is the hotel shower fitting that looks striking, but proves im-
possible to discover how to make it work.

While Sheridan’s analysis of functional beauty draws on philosophy and psychology using
language that is unfamiliar to the engineer, the concepts are readily grasped if reinterpreted
with the more accessible terminology introduced in Figure 3, and the conclusion that a good
design is both recognisable in terms of function and is fit for purpose, is obvious to the engineer.
However this analysis does also provide additional insights into how a design can fail aestheti-
cally, and so takes the engineer beyond the platitude that ‘form follows function.’

Figure 3. The parameters of functional beauty (after Sheridan 2014)

4 CONFLICTING CULTURAL NORMS

The concept described above need not cause any difficulty for the engineer, as it provides
straight forward guidance that points the way to a satisfactory solution that has ‘functional
beauty’. Like the philosophy that form follows function, it makes no reference to style, nor
does it require judgements as to whether as solution will ‘please the aesthetic senses’. In fact,
like many theories of design, this concept is as much describing practice as providing guidance.
Many successful engineering designers who have never heard the term ‘functional beauty’,
would say that the diagram in Figure 3 simply indicates what they strive to do. However the
research underlying this paper, in part based on fieldwork in Indonesia, has led to a questioning
of the adequacy of this approach in some situations, especially when there is a cross-cultural
element to the problem.
The objective of the research was to develop a sustainable fishing vessel for the small scale
fishers of Indonesia, this country being second to China in the scale of its capture fisheries
(FAO 2016). It is estimated that there are over 640 thousand fishing vessels with 2.7 million
fishers (MMAF 2014) directly employed aboard these vessels, and many more people working
in related onshore activities. Amongst the fleets of locally built wooden vessels there are a
small minority of craft that are built of fibre reinforced plastic (FRP), many of which have been
provided to the communities in a series of initiatives by the Indonesian government or interna-
tional agencies. However the success of these projects has been variable and further plans to
continue such projects fiercely debated (Wibawa 2016, 5-6). Surveys undertaken by the authors
demonstrated why this type of support for the fishing communities has been so controversial
as it was observed that while some of these donated vessels were widely used, others were
quickly abandoned. These rejected vessels could be found unused in remote corners of fishing
harbours, even when they were only a few months old. The fact that both successful designs,
and those that were not adopted, had significant technical variations from the locally built ves-
sels indicated that it was not the imposition of unfamiliar technology that was the barrier to
acceptance. The most obvious example of the introduction of an innovative technology was the
use of fibre reinforced plastic (FRP) as the construction material. FRP inevitably introduces
problems for the operators as it is difficult to modify and repair when compared to the tradi-
tional wooden vessels. Yet despite this difficulty examples could be found of FRP craft which
were widely adopted (Figure 4) as well as examples where they had been rejected (Figure 5).
While it is possible to identify elements of the failing designs where the operators’ require-
ments have only been partially met, of greater significance is the fact that the successful designs
emulate the shape and form of the traditional vessels, while the unsuccessful designs contrast
strongly and present an aesthetic style that can be characterised as ‘modern’ or ‘western’. The
authors recognise that the failure to adopt innovative technology in the development context
could be due to many issues including those associated with training, maintenance, ownership,
and infrastructure, and also recognise that ways to address these issues could include ensuring
that appropriate technology is employed and that stakeholder engagement is strong. However
in this paper it is the significance of the appearance of newly introduced technology that is
being considered.

Figure 4. Fibre reinforced plastic (FRP) boats of a type initially provided as aid after the 2004 tsunami have been
widely adopted, and continue to be built on a commercial basis.
Figure 5. An example of a relatively new FRP fishing vessel that has been abandoned.

The observed lack of acceptance of ‘western’ looking vessels contrasting with the enthusi-
astic adoption of vessels that followed the Indonesian style led the authors to consider the role
of aesthetics in the context of technology transfer, and to propose the hypothesis that a cultural
mismatch can be a significant barrier to the adoption of technology. Set in the maritime context
of the design of fishing vessels as a specific example, the argument can be expanded as follows.
If a consultant from the developed world were engaged to design an improved vessel for the
developing world, the focus of the naval architect would tend to be on the economic, opera-
tional and technical requirements. The issue of appearance might be ignored on the premise
that form follows function, however despite this there will still be an unconscious bias toward
a solution that looks ‘right’ to the consultant. The result will be one that presents the consult-
ant’s own preferences of what is aesthetically pleasing but, more significantly and almost un-
avoidably, it will reflect the norms dominant in the consultant’s own culture. This will not be
a considered decision, it will simply embody the consultant’s belief as to what a fishing vessel
should look like. Imagine however if the geographical direction of the flow of expertise were
reversed. Imagine trying to persuade fishermen from the north of Scotland (or Norway, or Can-
ada) that a boat with the most up to date technology was available to them, but it looked like
the vessel in Figure 1. No matter how big the subsidy offered, even 100% of the cost, it is
highly improbable that the fishermen would be willing to take ownership of such a vessel. The
cultural gulf demonstrated by the appearance of the vessel is just too great to bridge. This how-
ever is what is being done when an expert from the developed world proposes to introduce a
‘better’ solution into a developing world context – the cultural gulf, the mismatch, can be such
a significant barrier as to make the new technology unacceptable.
5 OVERLAPPING CULTURES

The discussion above simplifies cultural differences, presenting an artificial case where two
cultures are entirely alien to each other. In practice, in the digitally connected and in many
aspects globally unified world of the 21st century there is an interchange of cultural values,
and an overlap of norms. Indonesian boats can be seen decorated with the insignia of the foot-
ball clubs of the European leagues, Figure 6, just as in many parts of the developed world satay,
the Indonesian dish, is enjoyed when dining out. In addition in many situations designers do
not have to conform to cultural norms, but make it their purpose to change perceptions, the
world of fashion being the prime example of this. Marketing in any field is partly about dis-
covering what the customer desires, and partly about convincing them that an alternative is
even more desirable. However, in the case of promoting economic development through the
transfer of technology, trying to drive a change in aesthetic values (either deliberately or un-
consciously) is unnecessary and may obstruct achieving the primary objective. So rather than
creating an additional potential obstacle to the successful introduction of new ideas, the de-
signer should try to align the appearance of the proposed design with the prevailing culture.
The difficulty of achieving this when the engineer is an outsider, operating in the context of an
unfamiliar culture, should not be underestimated. The important cultural elements are not nec-
essarily the obvious flamboyant ones, but subtle and obscure details that are difficult to iden-
tify. In addition, while a consultant may be unaware of how their own culture could be influ-
encing and impacting on their decision making, so the customer may be unable or unwilling to
express the cultural imperatives of their world. This could be because the specific details are
in their eyes so obvious as not to be worth remarking on, or it could be because they are reli-
gious or spiritual in origin (Parastu, Sudamarwan, and Budiarta 2013), as shown in Figure 7,
and any explanations might be considered difficult or inappropriate.

Figure 6. Evidence of cross cultural influences, here European football club insignia being used as ornamentation.
Figure 7. Examples of ornamentation that have regional or religious significance.

6 BALANCING THE COSTS AND BENEFITS OF BEAUTY

The insights, discussed above, into the role of aesthetics in engineering design emerged from
research into the design of fishing vessels in the developing world, where it was realised that
unless proper attention was given to the appearance of the design the proposal was at risk of
being rejected by the operators however good the technology might be. Other benefits of raising
the priority of visual appearance were then recognised that were universally applicable, includ-
ing the potential for gaining a marketing advantage by generating a brand identity, and the
greater satisfaction and loyalty generated in the operators if they could have pride in their vessel
or equipment. It could even be argued that such pride might be translated into an enhanced
attitude to health and safety.
Although it is clear that there are benefits from considering aesthetics in a design, in a com-
mercial context this has to be balanced against cost. However in many cases there is no need
for a good looking design, even a beautiful one, to be more expensive than a utilitarian or ugly
one. To understand this the concept of ‘satisficing’, first proposed in 1969 by Simon (1996),
needs to be revisited. Simon pointed out that although optimisation techniques are used
throughout the design process, the final result is not an optimal one, but one that satisfies the
design requirements. The optimising process stops once the requirements are met, as to con-
tinue would be an unnecessary expenditure of resources. However if Simon’s idea of satisficing
is considered further it can be seen that this process leads to an unexpected conundrum. Unlike
the result of optimisation, satisficing does not lead to the inevitable single solution, but to one
of a multitude of solutions all of which should be equally acceptable, as all would satisfy the
design requirements. Although in theory all such solutions are equally good in practice the
customer, if given a choice, would be able to indicate a preferred design.
Such a preference is not captured in the design requirements, but it would reflect the cus-
tomer’s priorities. When making design decisions compromises are traded. All of the many
possible solutions balance these compromises differently, but given a choice the customer
would be able to recognise which most closely reflects their values. For the designer to develop
a design that will respond to the customer’s values, it is necessary for them to be aware of the
customer’s priorities. If the design process starts with the elements that are most important to
the customer, and the customer’s priorities are considered every time a decision that requires
compromise is made, then the result of the satisficing process will be one that reflects the cus-
tomer’s values. Optimisation processes are often explained by the analogy with climbing a hill,
where the objective is to find the summit. Satisficing only requires that a predetermined altitude
be reached, but the point where the optimising search process reaches that contour is defined
by the point at the bottom of the hill where the climb starts. If the designer can start in the right
place, then the result is more likely to respond to the customer’s priorities and values.
While this principle applies to all the technical elements of a design, the customer will also
have aesthetic values derived from personal taste and from the norms of their culture. As with
technical aspects, if the style of the product is established at the outset, and appearance set
alongside other considerations when each design decision is made, then the satisficing process
will produce a result that reflects an aesthetic preference. While aesthetic considerations should
not disrupt function or safety (Brewer, 1994) in many cases the technical design decisions do
not relate to geometry and appearance, or at least only in a general way, so this aspect of the
decision can be guided by aesthetic preferences with no impact on the technical outcome. If all
else is equal, and if the design requirements have been satisfied then all else really is equal, the
customer would prefer a design that is in their eyes beautiful.

7 EMBEDDING AESTHETICS IN ENGINEERING DESIGN THEORY

In developing a sustainable fishing vessel for operation in the waters of Indonesia, the authors’
research led them to recognise that the vessel’s appearance could be crucial to acceptance of
proposed technical innovations. The technology had to be packaged in a form that was familiar,
even appealing, to the operators. Responding to this concern became a significant part of all
stages of the design process. Aesthetic considerations were integrated into all of the following:
the requirement elicitation process; the interpolation of data from existing ‘basis’ vessels; and
the evaluation of proposed designs (by referring to focus groups of fishing vessel skippers, as
described in detail below). This extended process resulted in a design that contained all the
technology identified as appropriate for a sustainable fishing vessel in the Indonesian context,
but also one that would look at home in the fishing ports of the region, and so would be admired
and desired by the fishers who would operate it.
Reflecting on this practical implementation of a design process, where aesthetic considera-
tions have been given a high priority, can provide suggestions as to how this often ignored
aspect of engineering design could be formally embedded into the design process in other sit-
uations. In exploring the role of aesthetics we can follow the terminology of formal optimisa-
tion as defined by Sen and Yang (2012, 18). In this interpretation of design the criteria are
stated as objectives, each of which links an attribute to a required direction. For example the
attribute ‘cost’ must be low, so the direction of the design process is to reduce this, while the
attribute ‘stability’ (for a fishing vessel) must be high, so the direction is to increase this. If
there is a specified threshold value to be achieved for the result to be accepted then the objective
is considered a ‘constraint’, however if it is simply an aspiration to achieve the best possible
result the objective is termed a ‘goal’. In the examples just mentioned, stability is a constraint
if it is specified that it must meet the requirements of regulations, while cost is a goal if it is
simply required to be as low as possible. In these terms if appearance is included in the criteria
for a design then this objective can be categorised as a goal, specifically to make the design as
aesthetically pleasing to the customer as possible.
Design theorists usually resort to diagrammatic representations of the design process, and
these models are as numerous as there are theorists. While not intending to introduce another
model, it was noted earlier in this paper that aesthetics are neglected in many such models for
engineering design so it is interesting to consider how this element could be incorporated. A
widely accepted graphical interpretation of design at the strategic level is that of a spiral, indi-
cating that each sub-problem in the design process has to be returned to iteratively until the
requirements are satisfied. Versions of this model exist for different engineering sectors, and
in the marine field such a visualisation of the process was first proposed by Evans (1959, 671-
678). Other authors subsequently devised modified proposals to emphasise specific elements
of the process such as the economic evaluation (Buxton 1987, 78), or to accommodate partic-
ular vessel types such as yachts (Larsson and Eliasson 2014, 5). While acknowledging that the
spiral model is a huge simplification of the complexity of the activity of design, it has proven
its value in communicating the nature of design to students and aspiring designers. As the spiral
effectively facilitates a greater understanding it may be helpful to identify where aesthetics
could be explicitly indicated in this model of the process.
The design spiral has two components, the circular loops indicating one complete cycle of
the design process, and the radial spokes indicating sub problems that have to be addressed.
Visualisation of the proposed design is an integral part of many of the sub problems, as pro-
ducing a graphical representation of most elements of the design is an essential part of formu-
lating a solution. However creating a drawing does not automatically imply that aesthetics have
been taken into consideration.
Figure 8 presents a simple design spiral with aesthetic decision making explicitly identified
in the design process. As can be seen aesthetics are considered in two ways. Firstly there is a
dedicated ‘spoke’ added to the spiral at an early stage. This indicates that the ‘style’ and overall
impression of the product should be explored (in sketches) at the very start of the synthesis
process, and that this initial conjectured solution should be revisited in subsequent iterations as
more detail is generated. It is interesting to consider the positioning of aesthetics in this respect,
and to contrast it with other design goals, such as safety and cost. While all three, (aesthetics,
safety and cost) provide a ‘direction’ for design decisions throughout the process, the latter two
are essentially evaluated at the end of each iteration of the process, while aesthetics is consid-
ered at the beginning, so providing a visual template into which other decisions try to fit. Sec-
ondly Figure 8 shows that one of the loops of the process could also be considered as an aes-
thetic iteration. Although the concentric loops of the spiral are not usually explicitly identified,
the outermost one is dedicated to establishing the value of the principal parameters of the de-
sign, so producing a symbolic model that defines the product only in terms of numbers (things
like size, weight, capacity, power etc.). The next iteration is a visualisation one, where the
symbolic model is turned into an iconic model in the form of sketches of what the product
could look like. This is where aesthetics can again be seen to be considered explicitly, ensuring
that of the many possible geometric forms that could satisfy the numerical requirement, a ge-
ometry is selected that also conforms to the aesthetic preferences of the customer.
 Figure 8. A generalised design spiral, with aesthetics explicitly indicated.

8 AESTHETICS IN ENGINEERING DESIGN PRACTICE

Designers sketch possible solutions at the very earliest stages of the design process, conjectured
from imagination and prior experience, or by adapting established solutions. While sketching
every designer will be making choices based on what is considered to be the desired appear-
ance, though it is possible that the designer will perceive the result an inevitable outcome of
form following function. However in the light of the discussion above it is possible to consider
the way that these decisions regarding appearance can be taken, as this is affected by the cul-
tural context of the design activity.
In most cases the designer will be operating within a culture that is entirely familiar, which
implies that the aesthetic values of the designer (their taste) aligns with that of the customer.
Even without any explicit discussion as to appearance, the designer’s instinct will be met with
a favourable response. However even in this situation the designer does have a choice, which
is either to stay safely within the conventional norms, or alternatively to step outside accepted
solutions and introduce an imaginative or innovative proposal. In the former case the designer
could be said to be following fashion. In the marine context this is achieved by consideration
of the geometry of a number of basis vessels, then by scaling the dimensions using methods
such as those suggested by Larsson and Eliasson (2014), to arrive at a proposal that is entirely
in keeping with other vessels of a similar type. However in the latter case, where the designer
proposes to introduce a design that is in appearance at variance from the established ones, the
designer must have confidence that they are so familiar with the product, and so knowledgeable
of the customer’s aspirations and ambitions, that they can propose a solution that the customer
will recognise as being just right despite its unusualness. If this is successful the client will be
delighted that the proposed design exceeds expectations, and is evidence that the designer is so
in tune with trends that they can lead fashion rather than follow it. This is clearly a risky strat-
egy, but where marketing suggests that product or brand differentiation is beneficial, then this
is necessary.
The contrasting situation, and the one which instigated this exploration of the role of aes-
thetics in design, is where the designer is working in an unfamiliar cultural setting. The design
will provide an innovative technical solution in an area where the designer has recognised ex-
pertise, but the product will be operated in a cultural setting greatly contrasting from the de-
signer’s own. In this situation the risk of providing a visually innovative solution is great, as
the designer may unwittingly present something that is at the very least unappealing to local
taste and alien to cultural norms, and at worst offensive to religious or cultural sensibilities.
Innovation theory suggests that new ideas should be introduced gradually in order to minimise
the risk of failure (Abernathy 1988), so while technological innovation may be the purpose of
the design exercise, introducing an innovative aesthetic adds unnecessary risk, so the designer
should as far as possible maintain the appearance of the existing solutions. This situation is an
extreme case of the method described above as ‘following fashion’, but here the designer must
set aside their own preferences and tastes, and follow un-critically the norms identified from
the existing solutions.
In the case of designing a fishing vessel for Indonesia, it was necessary to first select from
the many contrasting vessels and regional variations (Samodra 2009) an appropriate vessel type
that was extensively operated in the relevant area. In this case the paying, a boat type commonly
operated out of Muncar and other ports of eastern Java was selected. The fleet was analysed in
detail by considering the geometry of a selection of basis vessels and from this the expected
dimensions and proportions of the craft were identified. This numerical analysis of the geom-
etry included all significant visual features such as shape and angle of the bow and stern, the
curvature of the deck line, the position and proportions of the cabin, and position and height of
the mast. In addition relevant stakeholders, such as skippers, crews and owners, were engaged
with at the outset of the process by using questionnaires and interviews (Figure 9).

Figure 9. Questionnaires and in-depth interviews were conducted with stakeholders in their own environment,
here with a fishing vessel skipper and crew member aboard their boat.
Figure 10. A focus group of stakeholders using scale models to evaluate alternative desigmn proposals.

It is quite possible to process the data from surveys of existing designs and still arrive at
something that many would agree is ugly. However there are fundamental aesthetic consider-
ations which are explored in the fine arts and in graphic and industrial design and which refer-
ence ancient cultures as their sources. These aesthetic principles are rarely explored in the en-
gineering design context, however in the marine field the work by Guiton (1971) provides some
analysis of what is effective in the context of ships and yachts. While it is not proposed to
enlarge on this here, it can be noted that in considering the overall impression of the vessel
Guiton emphasises the importance of conformity of lines (converging on focal points for ex-
ample), and of the shape and proportions of the visual envelope, or overlapping envelopes, in
which the design is contained. When developing the fishing vessel for Indonesia the authors
used these principles in conjunction with the numerical data derived from basis vessels and the
qualitative information elicited from the stakeholder interviews. (In doing this the authors as-
sumed that these aesthetic principles are not a uniquely western convention, but are universal
and can be applied in any culture, however it is recognised that further interdisciplinary re-
search is needed to explore this.)
The stakeholders were referred to again toward the end of the design process when focus
groups were organised to provide a critical commentary on the proposed designs (Figure 10).
All the stakeholders participating in these groups brought valuable experience and knowledge
to the sessions, however recognising that many had limited formal education, and as a result
limited literacy and ability to interpret technical drawings, scale models were used to com-
municate what was proposed and to facilitate discussion, as can be seen in Figure 10. This close
involvement with the operators, combined with the analysis of the geometry of basis vessels,
was considered essential in order to avoid introducing or omitting visual elements to the pro-
posed solution that, although unremarked by the designers, were of significance to the opera-
tors. The entire design process is detailed by Wibawa (2016) with the resulting design shown
in Figure 11, and a computer generated visualisation shown in Figure 12.

9 CONCLUSION

In engineering design the effort to develop a product that is efficient and profitable, with mul-
tiple design drivers that can include ease of manufacture, ease of maintenance, a minimum
carbon footprint, maximum recyclability, and conformance with relevant regulations, it is un-
surprising that appearance is often considered irrelevant, implying that aesthetics has no sig-
nificance in the design process. However insights into the role of aesthetics was an unexpected
outcome of combining research into the traditional fishing vessels of Indonesia with the chal-
lenge of designing a small sustainable fishing vessel for operation in the coastal waters of east-
ern Java. During the research it was observed that in a cross cultural context simply producing
a good technical solution did not guarantee acceptance by the intended operators. If the appear-
ance was not sympathetic to cultural norms and to the fishers’ expectations of what looked
appropriate then this would create a barrier that could result in appropriate technological inno-
vations being rejected. Reflecting on this it was realised that benefits can be gained in other
situations if a design is visually pleasing, such as market or product differentiation and more
highly motivated operators. However of greater significance was the realisations that aesthetic
decisions are continually being made during the design process, even if these are not conscious
decisions but simply a reflection of the designer’s personal preferences and cultural condition-
ing.
If it is accepted that aesthetic decisions are unavoidably being made, even if unconsciously or
by default, and also that good aesthetic design can have direct benefits, then it is important to
recognise that enhancing the appearance of a proposed design need not have resource implica-
tions. In many cases there are numerous geometries that will provide equally good technical
solutions, so identifying a geometry that evokes pleasure, or even one that ‘exalts the mind or
spirit’ (to quote again the dictionary definition of beauty [Merriam-Webster 2017]) need not
cost more. Establishing what is pleasing to the eye in a cross-cultural context can be a signifi-
cant challenge, overcome by close engagement with all the relevant stakeholders. In a more
conventional setting identifying the stylistic and visual preferences of the client should be part
of the requirement elicitation process, with the result that from all the possible solutions that
would satisfy the technical requirements, the final proposal is one that also visually delights.
Figure 11. Drawing of the final design for a sustainable fishing vessel for the small scale fisheries of east Java,
Indonesia.

Figure 12. Visualisation of the fishing vessel design.

REFERENCES

Abernathy, William J. 1988. “Mapping the Winds of Creative Destruction” in Readings in the Management of
Innovation, edited by M.C. Tushman. USA: Ballinger Publishing.
Birmingham, Richard, Graham Cleland, Robert Driver, and David Maffin. 1995. Understanding Engineering De-
sign – Context, Theory and Practice. London: Prentice Hall.
Brewer, T. 1994. Understanding Boat Design. Maine: International Marine.
Buxton, I. L. 1987. Engineering Economics and Ship Design. 3rd ed. British Maritime Technology.
Evans, J. Harvey. 1959. “Basic Design Concepts.” Naval Engineers Journal 7 (4)
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation). 2016. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2016.
“The Fifty Most Beautiful Superyachts Ever Built.” 2015. SuperYacht World, January 3. http://www.superyacht-
world.com/yachts/the-most-beautiful-superyachts-ever-built-5841
Guiton, J. 1971. Aesthetic Aspect of Ship and Yacht Design. London: Adlard Coles.
Larsson, Lars, Rolf E. Eliasson. 2014. Principles of Yacht Design. 4th ed. London: Bloomsbury Adlard Coles
Merriam-Webster Dictionary. 2017. Merriam-Webster. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/beauty
MMAF (Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries). 2014. Marine and Fisheries in Figures 2014. Indonesia.
Montgomery, Angus. 2015. “Designing the Interiors for a 141000-ton Cruise Ship.” Design Week, January 8.
https://www.designweek.co.uk/issues/5-11-january-2015/designing-the-interiors-for-a-141000-ton-cruise-
ship/
Oxford Living Dictionaries. 2017. Oxford University Press. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/beauty
Parastu, P, A. Sudamarwan, and Budiarta. 2013. “The Ornament of Fishing Vessels in Perancak Village, Jembrana
District, Indonesia.” E-Journal Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha.
Samodra. 2009. “Traditional Boatbuilding in Indonesia: a Social and Technological Study of Current Practice and
a Proposal for Appropriate Future Development.” PhD Thesis, Newcastle University, UK.
Sen, Pratyush, Jian-Bo Yang. 2012. Multiple Criteria support in Engineering Design. London: Springer-Verlag
Sheridan, Jonathan Andrew. 2014. “Synthesis of Aesthetics for Ship Design.” MPhil Thesis, University of South-
ampton.
Simon, Herbert A. 1996. The Sciences of the Artificial. 3rd ed. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Sullivan, Luis H. 1896. “The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered.” Lippincott’s Magazine, March.
https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/architecture/4-205-analysis-of-contemporary-architecture-fall-2009/read-
ings/MIT4_205F09_Sullivan.pdf
Wibawa, I. P. A. 2016. “Sustainable Fishing Vessel Development by Prioritising Stakeholder Engagement in
Indonesian Small-scale Fisheries.” PhD Thesis, Newcastle University, UK.